The UK’s National Health Service has created a pamphlet for all students that you’ll never see in the US:
“Under the heading ‘an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away’, the leaflet says: ‘Health promotion experts advocate five portions of fruit and veg a day and 30 minutes physical activity three times a week. What about sex or masturbation twice a week?’
The advice, which also claims regular sex is good for cardiovascular health, has been circulated to parents, teachers and youth workers.”
Ha. I think US classrooms would explode (with rage, not orgasms) if this sort of thing was passed out by NIH. While I agree teaching sex positivity is a good thing, and that orgasms are even better (woo orgasms), their track record doesn’t sound so good:
“It came to light just a week after it emerged that teenagers who took part in a £6million Government initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies were more than twice as likely to fall pregnant as other girls.
The scheme tried to persuade girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex.”
Hmmm…when we have abstinence programs the girls come out the same as the ones not in the program, not worse. Are brits just particularly rebellious or something? Were they cheap and handing out expired condoms? Who knows.
Obviously plenty of Brits are upset about this, but I’m just kind of apathetically amused. Except for the picture they use in the article:
Come on, how long are we going to stereotype Slytherins as the naughty British pupils?* I bet those Gryffindors have just as much as passionate unprotected sex, if not more.**
*Jen has Harry Potter on the brain because she’s going to the MIDNIGHT SHOWING TOMORROW WOOOO!!
**Ravenclaw would totally be the smartest about sex. Go Ravenclaw!
(RAVENCLAW, WOOO!!)
Yay for orgasms!
(RAVENCLAW, WOOO!!)Yay for orgasms!
I bet the Hufflepuffs are the worst for unprotected sex =P
I bet the Hufflepuffs are the worst for unprotected sex =P
Neat post! Thanks for sharing!
Neat post! Thanks for sharing!
My first thought on reading just the title of your post in my feed reader was "well, duh"!
My first thought on reading just the title of your post in my feed reader was “well, duh”!
You might want to read this http://www.drpetra.co.uk/blog/?p=866. The media misreported a study again. In short, it was a pilot study with no control group.
You might want to read this http://www.drpetra.co.uk/blog/…. The media misreported a study again. In short, it was a pilot study with no control group.
Glad I read that, or I would have been thinking of that all night long. I can see why they ran with the header that they did, but at the same time it creates issues like this, where the article is misquoted and then represented as a “fact” that supports uninformed opinions rather than educating people on the reality of issues. Though the sad thing is that in a capitalist society, when something sells well it usually continues to run again, unless there is an outcry over the inaccuracy of the post. and when a journalist organization is already predispositioned towards this sort of reporting, it’s unlikely that any sort of outrage will prevent them from doing it again.